Ann O'Maly

I don't get it. The bride looks modest to me. On the other hand, are those tight pants the groom is wearing? 

A couple of Jehovah's Witnesses and a Jehovah's Witnesses couple are both correct. Low-cut is in the eye of the beholder. Unless the brother officiating at the wedding objects then there should not be any problem.  

From everything I've seen on this so far, on scholarly sites, well-referenced sites, and pro-Islamic sites, it appears that this idea is merely based on a linguistic confusion from non-Muslims. I found this as the first item that came up in Google when I searched on "crescent moon Islam":
https://www.quora.com/How-did-the-new-moon-become-the-symbol-of-Islam
The hilal (Star and Crescent moon) does not, in fact represent Islam. It pre-dates Islam by about 2000 years. It appears, for instance, on the seals and decorations of the Moabites, of Israel, at about 1500BC.

In the past, it was most notably used on the flag of the Ottoman Empire - especially its navy:
 
 

So, it became emblematic of Islamic power, throughout Europe and beyond, in this period. It remains the symbol on the national flag of Turkey, for this reason.

From this, many other, largely Islamic, countries (especially many of the ones set up in the dissolution of the USSR) included the hilal in their national flags - in the same way that many European nations include the cross. It's sort-of-cultural, but not very significant. Some suggest it represents the lunar month, the period of fasting observed during Ramadan, but if does, the fact that its existence was common place throughout Arabia and across Moghul India, long before Islam, indicates that is an adoption, rather than central to that faith.

Since the 1960s, various Islamist movements have also adopted the hilal (probably because of its Ottoman connotations), and so it is often assumed to be an inherently Islamic symbol.

It is possible that there is confusion over the way its name sounds similar to 'Halal' (lawful), that many Westerners think it is in some way bound up in Islam itself.
 
This is agreed upon by sites that purport to represent the Islamic faith:
On the Ottoman flag was the crescent moon – a symbol the Turks adopted from the city of Constantinople after conquering it. Because the crescent moon was the symbol for the Ottomans, it also became the symbol for Muslims in general for many in the West. It has since been adopted by some Muslim nations – finding its way onto the flags of countries as diverse as Malaysia, Pakistan and Algeria. Although some in the Muslim community reject the crescent moon because it can be seen as a pagan symbol.  

I love it. Just a couple of nights ago, I "drove" through my old hometown in a place I hadn't been in for 30 years, to see if I could still find the places I had worked, the old territories I had worked by myself as a pioneer (my "magazine route"), schools I attended, the bowling alley, the parks, the restaurants, my studies and return visits, where all the friends from the congregation lived. It's a great way to trigger memories I might otherwise have forgotten about. I was able to make a list of about 60 names from a congregation of 70 publishers. 
Judging from his shirt, I think he's saying this:
JOGGING IS A SNARE AND A RACKET! MILLIONS NOW JOGGING WILL STILL DIE! 
But you are right that we can't make any assumptions here. In NYC there are competing voices at the same corners as the Witnesses all the time. At Union Square Park (14th St) the carts used to set up early last year, and there have been so many competing messages for the past couple years that this park hardly sees any Witnesses now except on the weekend, and even then it's in the quietest area where hardly anyone notices.   

Oxford Circus. Thank the Interwebs for Google Street View ?  
I would love to know the story behind that picture. Is 'loudspeaker man' shouting about JWs or something completely unrelated?
AWESOME! 

It's a "congregation" where any one of us can pick up a 12-pt or a 14-pt "megaphone" in a professional looking font. We can even shout in a bolder and larger font if we wish.

@Maron should realize that some here are JWs being serious. Some are JWs making jokes. Some are non-JWs heaping ridicule. This is not the congregation where you personally know people

I think the man with the loudspeaker is walking up and down past the hospital building rapping and beatboxing at the top of his voice, but really, really badly, and he won't shut up. He's been going at it for 5 hours straight and believes his new composition is the best he's done yet so he wants the exposure. Meanwhile inside, a mother and child are in great distress - see the child is crying. This contributes to the awful din being heard inside the hospital, so much so, that the patients and hospital staff are getting severe headaches. Everyone is in a state of high anxiety. To throw off all that anxiety, throw things at the man.
Hope that helps.

I have no interest in Valentine's Day, but I understand the appeal, especially for young ones, to have an excuse to express an amorous feeling verbally in a kind of teasing way that won't get them into trouble (because the holiday is designed to create an approved way to do this without the typical issues that young ones would deal with trying to navigate social norms). But the very fact that such a day was named after a "saint" that I knew nothing about was enough for me to avoid it and disapprove of it for my children. I can't say I ever cared to learn about the true history of the holiday, but it wouldn't surprise me that many things that might have some small value to some people are based on practices that we would and should find disgusting today.
I often hear that we make it difficult to our children to get along in school by taking away so many things that others find "innocent." To me, however, taking a stand against something is a good and healthy thing, as long as we can explain our reasons correctly. (1 Peter 3:15)
That said, I am very glad that someone (Ann, in this case) actually answered the question with relevant research. The question implies that Jehovah's Witnesses believe that Valentine's Day is related to Nimrod, and this should be quite embarrassing to many Jehovah's Witnesses, if they don't know anything about the basis for the claim.
The Bible doesn't say anything about Nimrod being related to any one of the gods mentioned in the OP. None of that is Biblical and therefore 2 Tim 3:16 doesn't apply directly.
What if the topic had been:
Was Santa Claus and the Babylonian God of Pedophiles the same god worshiped?
The Bible does not say anything about a Babylonian God of Pedophiles, of course, but neither does it say anything about Nimrod being worshiped. But if we became known as a group of supposed "Bible students" or "Bible researchers" and we went around talking about the "God of Pedophiles" then we should rightly be ridiculed for sloppy research. It turns out there also is no research that ties Nimrod to any of these claims we have made for him, either. 
Now if the discussion had turned toward false or improper practices and the ease with which religion absorbs these things for syncretic or ecumenical purposes, or the relationship of worldly attitudes in religion as a form of Satan's influence, then this could still be a useful and reasonable discussion of how such things from old still related to our times and our conscience. 
The fact that the Watch Tower publications stopped making such claims years ago, is a hint that we should probably be more careful ourselves. 
Just a quick follow-up quote from the Watchtower:
*** w84 9/1 p. 20 Would You Spread a Rumor? ***
DURING the Middle Ages an incredible rumor spread among the so-called Christians of Europe. It was whispered that each year at Passover, the Jews murdered a Christian and used his blood in their rituals. Sometimes they were said to capture Christian children and torture them horribly before killing them and using their blood. Right up until this century, during the Nazi period in Germany, this rumor was used as an excuse to persecute the Jews.
The story was investigated and disproved several times, yet it persisted for almost a thousand years. If someone had told it to you, would you have shared in spreading it? Hopefully, all of us would have had enough common sense or compassion not to do so. Yet rumors are persistent and complex things. Once started, they are difficult to stop. Even today, absurd rumors spring up and spread like wildfire.
For example, Procter & Gamble, a large firm supplying household products in the United States, was recently victimized by a rumor that it promoted Satanism and that its trademark was really a demon symbol. Another widespread rumor had it that a well-known chain of fast-food stores was putting worms in its hamburgers! Some years ago it was widely believed that a member of the singing group the Beatles had died in an auto accident and had been replaced by a double. Even the Watchtower Society’s publications have been the subject of rumors—for example, that one of the artists had secretly been introducing pictures of demons into the illustrations, was subsequently found out and disfellowshiped!
Did you share in spreading any such stories? If so, you were—perhaps unwittingly—spreading an untruth, since they were all false.
 

Ooh wow! Beautiful Southern Lights! ❤️️
More pictures from the same (I think) event in Nov. 2015.
Thanks for posting 

Ooh wow! Beautiful Southern Lights! ❤️️
More pictures from the same (I think) event in Nov. 2015.
Thanks for posting 

Ooh wow! Beautiful Southern Lights! ❤️️
More pictures from the same (I think) event in Nov. 2015.
Thanks for posting 

Ooh wow! Beautiful Southern Lights! ❤️️
More pictures from the same (I think) event in Nov. 2015.
Thanks for posting 

WHAT  an  originally, creative  photo !  Holding the moon up

JEHOVAH'S  HEAVENLY  STUNNING  COLORS - ALL  NORTH - LIGHT  COLORS  IN  ONE  MOMENT ❤
 

Governing Body member M. Stephen Lett mentions The Librarian in his Facebook post
Needless to say it caused me to smile widely.
Agape!
The Librarian
Via

This is a very prudent approach advised by Ann O'Maly, and I would hasten to add that even relatively modern, purely secular scholarship should be treated with caution also. After all, the term "modern" (as opposed to "antiquarian") is just a relative concept. Everything modern becomes antiquarian eventually.  But as for researching and verifying historical information on Babylonish religion to the level similar to that in the document linked below?
Well, this is not for the regular amateur, and whilst I have no criticism taking an interest in such matters (as I do myself), I suggest that most true Christians, with other priorities, might find an alternative approach more effective, one based on 2Tim 3:16. Why not save the embarrassment of arguing ineffectively on secular terms?
I like Queen Esther's approach:
Daniel chapter 1 provides an interesting snapshot of life in ancient Babylon for worshippers of Jehovah. I am sure Daniel and his friends were exposed to all manner of festivities, holidays etc., both secular and religious, during their 3-year training course in Babylonian culture. Dan 1:5. (We could all do with something similar really if we want to argue origins with secular authorities). 
But we have no reason to believe Daniel and co treated these Babylonian customs any differently than they did the dietary practices common to the level of society to which they were exposed. Comp Dan.1:8. In fact, in view of the words at De 8:3 (quoted later by Jesus), I suspect their attention to the avoidence of spritual defilement would have been even more diligent. And as they were living in the actual Babylonian environment that we seek to associate with more recent customs, there was surely no need for them to grapple with the arguments of academics to define what was or was not acceptable to Jehovah. And in view of the inherehent dangers to their spirituality in that environment, they would surely have just avoided whatever Jehovah had not commanded, would they not?.

====================================
thank you all for your comments ! 
====================================

The issue quoted from includes the following under the Christmas holiday heading, on page 195:
In its issue of December 26,
1927, the New York World carried a full-page
article on Christmas which showed beyond a
doubt that the day was observed by various
heathen nations for many centuries before the
birth of Christ. On the same date, the Chicago
Tribune, the Cincinnati Enquirer and the St.
Paul Daily News carried shorter articles proving
the heathen origin of the day. So did some
of the larger magazines of the country. Should
anyone desire to investigate the subject further,
after reading this article, I would recommend
a perusal of the following four books:
Kitto's Illustrated Commentary; Wilkinson's
Egyptians; History of Medieval Drama, by
Robinson; and The Two Babylons, by Alexander
Hyslop, an English clergyman. The last named
book is specially interesting in its revelations,
not only on the subject of Christmas,
but also on other holidays and feast days now
so popular.
However, the actual article on Valentine's Day has no reference to any origins that go back to Nimrod (although this is used for Easter and Christmas, etc). The portion of the above post from @Bible Speaks that looks like it comes from the Golden Age (starting with "The romantic nature of Valentine's Day...") is not from the Golden Age. It's from Catholic.org as is the next section starting out "The first representation..." The quote is interrupted with a reference to Nimrod which is an allusion to the chart that apparently derived originally from "The Two Babylons."
Here's the complete quote from the Golden Age regarding St. Valentine's Day, on page 208.
ST. VALENTINE'S DAY has nothing very
saintly to commend it as to its origin. The
whole month of February was given over by the
Romans to a period of almost unbridled licentiousness.
One of the common practices was for
a group of young men and young women to
meet together. The names of the young women
were placed in a box and the young men drew
them as chance directed and they became partners
for a day subsequently known as St. Valentine's
Day. The young woman's gift for the day
was a man.
The gift the young woman drew might be
more or less bad, mostly bad; and therefore the
gifts passed out on St. Valentine's Day are
often bad ones. It will be noticed that St. Valentine
is supposed to be the god of love, or at
least that cupids represent him. The dragging
of the word "saint" into this thing is only a
scheme of the Devil to make real saintliness
seem like what it is not, licentiousness.
 

@Ann O'Maly users are not discouraged from openly discussing topics on this platform. The @admin has been very clear about this issue many times.
 

I agree with this, too. But this also could mean that all persons who burn fossil fuels, drive a car, use fuel-based electricity, fly in a plane, take a cruise, etc., are all ruining the earth.
Of course the answer we expect to satisfy us is that we are more reasonable in the way we ruin the environment. That we are not like the big energy companies that take these fuels out of the ground for us. So this means, therefore, that as long as we only participate in ruining the earth, that we aren't going to be brought to ruin. I don't see many of us (or any of us) shouting this particular warning from the housetops to everyone who is ruining the earth. Most religions are silent about this particular warning, or even become complicit in the the politically expedient idea that politics trumps science on this subject. It's "politically correct" to be weak and hide from this problem.
(Surprisingly, one of the biggest factors ruining the earth is the "Western" version of suburbs, in spite of the fact that this appears to make more of the earth look like thousands of little parks.)

"For there will be hurricanes and volcanoes in one place after another, earth-wide pollution and a constant state of global war," said Jesus, never.

"For there will be hurricanes and volcanoes in one place after another, earth-wide pollution and a constant state of global war," said Jesus, never.

Or even with religious significance ... as the Organization has religious significance to the JW, does it not?
Give it time. 
Anyway, I was suggesting, in response to 'Is veneration of the cross a scriptural practice?', that veneration (or great respect, reverence) for an object of religious significance can occur in many forms. So I posed the question of whether it was a matter of degree to which one venerates a religious artifact and where the line might be drawn before scriptural principles are seen to be violated. Yes, maybe another thread.
It's OK. I'm not cross (geddit?).  

Oh boy, oh boy! James Thomas Rook Jr. is back!